About your Search

20121127
20121127
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
there at the consulate in benghazi. that's where their interest and focus and ire should be pointed. not at a u.n. ambassador who went on the sunday talk shows as a spokesperson for the administration giving, imparting the information she was given by the intelligence community. >> and susan, for those just joining us. this happened moments ago in the last hour. i want to remind everyone what the three senators had to say. take a look. >> we are significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got and some that we didn't get. >> bottom line, i'm more disturbed now than i was before that the 16 september explanation about how four americans died in benghazi, libya, by ambassador rice, i think, does not do justice to the reality at the time. >> clearly the impression that was given, the information given to the american people was wrong, in fact, ambassador rice said today absolutely, it was wrong. >> a lot of people going into this and speculated about the fact that rice was taking these meetings diplomatic approach. to paving the way to a potential nomination by the president. are they so en
with president obama. immigration will also probably be among those discussions. >>> 7:15. new this morning, u.n. ambassador susan rice is meeting with -- on capitol hill with three senators who have been critical of her initial explanation about the attacks in libya. jamie dupree has more from washington, d.c. via skype. >> reporter: there is a lot of talk that she will be nominated for the position of secretary of state. rice is here this morning meeting with senators john mcan, lindsey graham and others in the basement of the capitol. you can see a stakeout that's down there where vee with -- where we have microphones set up. we're hoping to hear from some senators later this morning about this meeting. rice has taken a lot of flack for her explanation on the talk shows about what happened on the attacks in libya on that u.s. facility in benghazi where four republicans were killed. a lot of republicans said she was basically relating a story that was not true about how this attack was fostered and caused by that anti-muslim video that's proven not to be so. but after briefings by intelligence
.m. eastern. a number of senators have been meeting with u.n. ambassador susan rice in the wake of her comments following the attack on the benghazi consulate. just wrapping up is a brief news conference and statement with senators. here is a look. >> i had a very candid ambassador rice embassador ric and the deputy director of the cia. [inaudible] she said if it was a spontaneous demonstration. it was not. there was telling evidence at that time. >> [inaudible] i am very disappointed in our intelligence community. i think they failed in many ways. i think it would be pretty clear that to explain this episode as related to a video that created a mob that turned into a riot was far-filled. at the end of the day, we are going to get to the bottom of this. we have to have a system that we trust. if you don't know what happened, just say you don't know what happened. you can say "i do not want to give that information." you can say the american people got bad information from president obama in the days after. the question is should they have been given the information at all? if you can d
that this system worked extremely well. it was 100% performance as a matter of fact. it's not bad for any u.n. organization to get the task and then i think it's probably the only one which succeeded to make it 100% performance. so the -- that means that both destruction capabilities and the monetary capabilities were forcefully placed. so everything looked shiny and fine until the u.s. government -- it was in spring of 1997, through madeline albright made the statement at george mason university, well, it looks like sanctions are -- disarmament is going well. if it goes well we can still not lift the sanctions which was a condition under the security council. sanctions -- so we can't lift the sanctions until saddam hussein is removed. so that came my obsession with the regime change. that, of course, destroyed in the sense the institution and operations. so i think that experience -- could havi annan led the group to see if they can re-establish something similar and this report of which has not been very much observed. i think we have ideas for iran. that will give really intrusive inspecti
has $30 billion in damage. >>> u.n. ambassador susan rice is heading to capitol hill today to meet with some of her toughest republican critics and answer questions about the september 11th attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi. rice will sit down with senators john mccain, lindsey graham, and kelly ayotte. >> that should be fun. >> that could be really awkward. they all accuse her of misleading the country in her initial account of the attack. in recent days, senator mccain has softened his criticism, and rice insists that she was relying on talking points from the intelligence community. last night senator graham rejected her defense but says he's open to today's meeting. >> she asked to meet with us, and i will listen to what she has to say about her role in benghazi, but i can tell you this. the more i know about benghazi, the more upset i am that the consulate was even open on september 11th. when you look at the history and the reporting coming out of libya about the dangers, it should never have been open or heavily reinforced. after the attack, i think the story we were
ambassador to the u.n. what about what's going on in the u.n. this week? with the palestinians looking to have their status -- there's an entire agenda. the idea that we're focusing on one set of talking points is ridiculous. >> i know you to be a pretty nonpartisan guy, do you smell anything fishy with this benghazi investigation or the way it was handled? do you sense any incompetence? because if you talk to john mccain or lindsey graham, you ask the question, are we talking about a cover-up or general inconfidence? >> the idea was, why did they turn down the all the added security? why did the ambassador go without adequate security? that's a real issue. why were these decisions made? the question, then, of the talking points, what did the cia provide, why was the intelligence community late in apparently getting the points right? it's not the first time we've seen things like that. it's worth looking at. but the idea that a month later, we're still focusing on this rather than basic questions of foreign policy on how to deal with terrorism in these areas. seems to me we are missing
in the mainstream media are flocking to the defense of u.n. ambassador susan rice for the role she played this this administration's cover-up of the benghazi terrorist attack. once again, they're using the race card to do it. this time it is coming from "the washington post" in an article written by the editorial board entitled the gop's attack on susan rice. it reads in part, "could it be as members of the congressional black caucus are charge that they're targeting ms. rice because she's an african american woman." they deny that, and we don't know their hearts. signatories, nearly half are from the forme form confederate. everybody knew within two or three days that this was a terror attack, except the obama white house. five sunday shows. the president two days later can't answer if it's a terrorist attack. call him out o on it, and it's race card, four more years. >> you can't color-code criticism. this is nothing to do with her skin color, susan rice. it's all about her competency. she misled the american people. that is what happened. americans want answers. those poor families of
me. she's the one that asked for the meeting. i didn't. >> don't think so. the embattled u.n. ambassador is sitting down with the senator who accused her of being incompetent and deceptive and called for watergate style hearings on libya. >> she gave deceptive information to the american people when there was clearly counter information that affirmed that this was a terrorist attack orchestrated by an al qaeda affiliated organization. >> by now you know the story. rice intimated a cheesy anti-islam film caused the murderous rampage at the consulate in benghazi, libya. not true. her assertion on several sunday talk shows was okayed by the intelligence community and caused one great big partisan brawl. soon, democrats piled on, accusing republicans of racism. >> susan rice's comments didn't send us to iraq and afghanistan. somebody else's did. but you're not angry with them. i would just say in closing that it is a shame that any time something goes wrong, they pick on women and minorities. i have a real issue with that. >> yet when asked about mccain, rice was conciliatory. >>
fearlessly stood up to the drug cartels found murdered. >>> and face-to-face behind closed doors today, u.n. ambassador susan rice takes on one of her sharpest critics, senator john mccain, over her actions after the benghazi attack. good morning and welcome to "early start," i'm deborah feyerick in for john berman. >> really nice to have you. >> i'm so glad to be here. >> i'm zoraida sambolin. it's 5:00 a.m. in the east. first, congress back to work, and back to bickering. in just under 35 days, america hits the fiscal cliff. that triggers severe spending cuts and tax hikes. several top republicans are now defying party politics and signaling a willingness to consider increasing tax revenues to get a budget deal done. but when the lame duck senate got back in session yesterday it sure sounded like the same old broken record. >> the senate has spoken. president obama has spoken. he's promising he will not sign any bill that mortgages our future to pay for handouts to the wealthiest 2% of americans. i only hope house republicans have been listening. >> we've been responsible, even as we've r
focused on yield. we have an the u.n. weight to equities. most of the equity exposure right now is outside of america. that's been a good thing for us since july and then we have an overweight to extend fixed economic and credit. looking at emerging market debt. watching carefully and still happy to own high yield debt and mortgage-backed securities. >> this is a serious question. we had peter fisher on the show, former undersecretary who said, you know, they just might do the right thing. either online or got your "wall street journal" in hand. what if they do the right thing. jeremy segal says stocks are going to 15,000 and 17,000. is that seriously possible? >> look, you have very little liquidity at year end, right, so there's in the a lot of volume in the markets so things can move much more. it's exaggerated. if we get a credible bipartisan deal december 15th you're going to have a huge relief rally into year end. >> 15,000, mr. baldwin? >> not right away. stocks are slightly overpriced. like them for 40 years, not sure about four months. >> good stuff. rebecca patterson and william
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)